A senatorial voting body could replace the existing undergraduate student government’s legislative duties if a proposed amendment is passed by council and approved by the student body.
President Gabe Rose and Finance Committee Chair Parsa Sobhani proposed a significant change to the legislative voting structure of the student government on Tuesday. USAC’s legislature is currently comprised of three executive seats, three general representatives and seven commissioners of varying specifications.
The new system, similar to that used by the Associated Students of the University of California at UC Berkeley, would replace the existing council seats with 20 senator positions elected at large by the undergraduate student body.
Though some council members expressed concern at the meeting, saying Rose had added the proposal to the agenda at the last minute, many were especially vocal about their concerns that the amendment would greatly diminish the power of officers to control finances and participate in the legislative body that so heavily influences their offices.
Ultimately, the council decided to table the proposal until next week after council members have had a chance to fully review the amendment.
Rose and Sobhani explained the positive impact such a change might make on the workload of elected officials, allowing legislative work and office programming duties to be handled by different individuals and simplifying the work of any single council member or senator.
“Right now, everyone at this table has a dual role: We run our offices and we come here on Tuesday nights and vote, and we sit on all these committees, and deal with funding. … The idea is, why not have people who want to do this sort of stuff specifically do this stuff, and people who want to run offices run the offices without having to worry about this,” Rose said.
The proposed system, Rose said, would be what he believes to be a more appropriate distribution of responsibility within the legislative machinery of USAC, and would assign tasks to elected senators that better suit the criteria on which they are elected ““ namely their goals for office programming.
“(Legislative work) is almost an afterthought for almost everyone,” Rose said, explaining that under the current system many council members consider their legislative work to be secondary to programing, removing energy from an important duty.
Though the existing version of the proposed amendment would create 20 senatorial positions, Rose said the number of new senatorial positions is somewhat arbitrary. He said he and Sobhani agreed on it as an initial figure that would lend itself to an accurate representation of student opinions.
Rose explained that proportional representation allows for a larger legislative body and thus lowers the minimum number of votes any single individual must achieve to win a seat. He said this kind of system allows for greater involvement from non-slate candidates but does have some drawbacks.
“Of course, you have a diminished voice, so it’s all about striking balance. You want a body that can be representative of campus but is not too large and unwieldy that it doesn’t get anything done,” he said.
Throughout the discussion, the council members were reminded of the similar proposals that had been presented and ultimately defeated in past years, the first of which arose at UCLA in the 1960s, said Administrative Alternate Rick Tuttle.
The knowledge of past failures did not, however, discourage some members of council from pushing for what they said would be a necessary evolution in undergraduate student government.
Administrative and alumni representatives voiced concerns regarding the proposal.
Berky Nelson, administrative representative, said the proposal was abrupt, and Rose’s decision to not inform him prior to the meeting showed a lack of courtesy.
“I do wonder what ““ if any ““ role I have as the administrative representative when I don’t know anything about this until now,” Nelson said.
“It seems some things are going on in the dark.”
Alumni Representative Willard Tressel said such a large change to the USAC constitution would require a longer discussion period in council.
“We needed at least a quarter for breathing space and discussion,” Tressel said. “I am a little disappointed that it was brought up this late.”
Tressel also said many problems such as those of finances and office space may arise due to the displacement of commissioners and executive officers and the inclusion of the 20 new senators.
Tuttle said he was concerned about the potential loss of voting power that commissioners could endure under the amendment.
Campus Events Commissioner Colin Iberti said his primary concern was that, by losing its legislative vote at Tuesday council meetings, his commission would surrender control of its funding.
Student Welfare Commissioner Jonathan Pham said his commission’s vocal power will also be taken away if the proposal is approved.
“If we are not part of the table, we won’t be able to ask questions and address our concerns,” Pham said.
He said a lack of communication may also exist among commissioners and senators.
“Right now I can go out and talk with council members at the table and be available,” Pham said. “It will be a lot harder to talk to people if we are not there.”
Rose said he hoped the council could begin a discussion and have a few weeks for more conversation.
“We can talk about it and collaborate it out over the next couple of weeks,” Rose said.
If the proposal is approved by the council it must then meet the approval of the student body.
If council members are able to reach an agreement within the next few weeks, the approved proposal would appear on the ballot but would not necessarily take effect the year following its approval because significant legislation will be needed to account for the election, payment and office appropriations for the senators.
Rose said the discussion could take several weeks and he had expected the amendment to be faced with some opposition.
Next Tuesday’s meeting will be held at the Northwest Campus Auditorium at 6:30 p.m. as part of an effort to increase the council’s visibility to on-campus residents and the student body at large. All meetings are open to the public.